Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation Individuals With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain
The Effectiveness and Mediators of Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation in the Reduction of Negative Emotional Response to Pain in Individuals With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain
1 other identifier
interventional
84
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation (CBM-I) trains participants to interpret ambiguous information as neutral or benign, rather than interpret it as being related to pain. The goal of this randomised controlled trial was to explore the feasibility and potential clinical benefits of CBM-I in people with chronic pain and also healthy, pain-free individuals.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable chronic-pain
Started Nov 2020
Shorter than P25 for not_applicable chronic-pain
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
November 17, 2020
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
May 1, 2021
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
May 1, 2021
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
April 4, 2024
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
April 16, 2024
CompletedApril 16, 2024
April 1, 2024
6 months
April 4, 2024
April 10, 2024
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (2)
Emotional response to exercise induced pain
Sensory and emotional pain words from the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) were presented, grouped as they are on the MPQ. Participants chose one word from each group most representing the pain experienced performing a dynamic arm exercise (rotating their arms in small circles forwards for 10 seconds then backwards for 10 seconds, repeating the process as many times as possible). Participants rated each word from 0 (not at all representative) to 10 (extremely representative) or indicated if none represented their exercise pain. Emotional response to exercise pain was calculated from intensity and representativeness scores. For intensity, words were assigned a numeric score according to MPQ instructions and summed for emotional and sensory words. For representativeness, mean rating of representativeness was calculated for sensory and emotional pain words. The sensory score was subtracted from the emotional score to compute emotional response to pain relative to the sensory experience.
Immediately post-intervention
Emotional response to pain-related images
Participants were presented twenty pain-related images, and asked to rate the extent to which they felt negative emotions while viewing the image. After a fixation cross presented for 500 ms, a pain-related picture was presented for 6000 ms. This was followed by another cross presented for 500 ms then numbers from 0 (not at all negative) to 10 (very negative) was displayed. Participants were instructed to look at the picture on the screen then to rate their negative emotion from 0 (not at all negative) to 10 (very negative). The mean rating of emotional response to pain-related images was calculated for each participant.
Immediately post-intervention
Secondary Outcomes (7)
Fear of Pain
Immediately post-intervention
Anxiety
Baseline
Depression
Baseline
Emotional response to average clinical pain
Immediately post-intervention
Pain severity
Baseline
- +2 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (4)
Benign CBM-I - Chronic pain
EXPERIMENTALChronic pain participants randomised to receive benign CBM-I, which uses the Ambiguous Situations Task to train participants to neutral meanings of ambiguous scenarios.
No CBM-I - Chronic pain
NO INTERVENTIONChronic pain participants randomised to the 'no CBM-I' condition complete the Ambiguous Situations Task without any form of bias modification.
Benign CBM-I - Healthy
EXPERIMENTALHealthy participants randomised to receive benign CBM-I, which uses the Ambiguous Situations Task to train participants to neutral meanings of ambiguous scenarios.
Pain-related CBM-I - Healthy
OTHERHealthy participants randomised to receive pain-related CBM-I, which uses the Ambiguous Situations Task to train participants to painful meanings of ambiguous scenarios.
Interventions
Benign cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation (CBM-I) trains participants to interpret ambiguous information as neutral or benign rather than pain-related.
Pain-related cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation (CBM-I) trains participants to interpret ambiguous information as pain-related.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Experience musculoskeletal pain (pain in muscles, bones, joints, tendons, or ligaments) that has lasted for at least the last 3 months before enrolment in the study
- Have visited a healthcare professional for their pain
- Aged 18-70 years
- Normal or corrected to normal vision
You may not qualify if:
- Any known reading difficulty
- Aged 18-70 years
- Normal or corrected to normal vision
- Experience frequent or continuous pain for the past three months before enrolment in the study
- Currently experiencing pain
- Any known reading difficulty
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
University of Southampton
Southampton, Hampshire, SO17 1BJ, United Kingdom
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Daniel E Schoth, PhD
University of Southampton
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT
- Masking Details
- Participants are not informed of the conditioned they are randomised to in this psychological intervention.
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
April 4, 2024
First Posted
April 16, 2024
Study Start
November 17, 2020
Primary Completion
May 1, 2021
Study Completion
May 1, 2021
Last Updated
April 16, 2024
Record last verified: 2024-04
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will share
- Shared Documents
- STUDY PROTOCOL, SAP, ANALYTIC CODE
- Time Frame
- Twelve months following publication of the results.
- Access Criteria
- Email the study authors.
Anonymised participant dataset that underlies the results reported in this article may be requested from the authors.